American Eagle Flight 3008 ALPA Submission

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

American Eagle Flight 3008 ALPA Submission SUBMISSION OF THE AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION TO THE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD REGARDING AN INCIDENT INVOLVING AMERICAN EAGLE AIRLINES FLIGHT 3008 Santa Maria, CA January 2, 2006 1 SUMMARY..........................................................................................................................................3 2 HISTORY OF FLIGHT......................................................................................................................3 3 WEATHER ..........................................................................................................................................5 3.1 WEATHER RADAR ........................................................................................................................ 5 3.2 AIRMETS ................................................................................................................................... 5 3.3 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................5 4 OPERATIONS.....................................................................................................................................5 4.1 DEFERRED DE-ICE TIMER CONTROL SYSTEM .............................................................................. 5 4.2 STALL WARNING SYSTEM............................................................................................................ 6 4.3 STALL RECOVERY TRAINING ....................................................................................................... 6 4.4 AUTOPILOT USAGE ....................................................................................................................... 6 5 FINDINGS............................................................................................................................................7 6 RECOMMENDATIONS.....................................................................................................................8 2 1 Summary On January 2, 2006 a Saab 340 aircraft operated by American Eagle Airlines as flight 3008 encountered icing conditions during an enroute climb over Santa Maria, California. At 11,700 feet mean sea level, (msl) the airplane departed controlled flight and descended to 6,500 feet msl before the crew was able to regain full control. The crew having declared an emergency elected to continue to their scheduled destination at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) where they landed without further incident. The airplane did not sustain any damage and there were no injuries reported by the 2 flight crew members, 1 flight attendant, or 25 passengers onboard. The flight had originated from San Luis County Regional Airport (SBP), San Luis Obispo, California. As party to this investigation, The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) is providing this submission to present our analysis of the factual records and provide recommendations to reduce the risk for future incidents or accidents that could occur under similar circumstances. 2 History of flight The incident flight was the fifth trip of the day for the flight crew, and their second trip in the incident airplane. On the trip prior to the incident flight, the captain was the pilot flying and had observed light rime ice accumulating on the wing surface and windshield wipers during their descent from 9,000 to 5,000 feet msl into SBP. The de-ice boot system was operated manually because the de-ice timer control system was logged as inoperative from a previous flight. The crew had an uneventful landing at SBP and arrived at the gate about 15 minutes late with an anticipated turnaround time of 20 minutes. While at the gate the captain took time to review the dispatch weather information which included two AIRMET (airmen’s meteorological information) reports that indicated a possibility of icing in clouds. Based upon the information he had, the captain concluded that the anticipated weather conditions fell within operational criteria defined by the American Eagle S340 Airplane Operating Manual (AOM) as “Ice Protection Level 2”. The airplane was equipped with the icing protection systems required by the AOM for these conditions which included Left & Right Engine anti-ice operational and the Wing/Stab boots operational either in the continuous mode or activated manually. Because the de-ice timer control system was reported to be inoperative the crew anticipated having to activate the Wing/Stab boots manually if needed. And as an extra precaution due to the short runway and gusty wind conditions anticipated at takeoff, it was decided that the captain would fly the initial departure and then transfer control authority to the first officer (FO) at the airplane’s acceleration altitude. The flight departed from SBP in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) with the captain flying the takeoff and initial climb as planned. At 2,500 feet msl the FO assumed the pilot-flying duties with the autopilot engaged in the medium (M) Climb mode which according to the AOM provides pitch commands to maintain approximately 160 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS), depending on the aircraft’s pressure altitude. Shortly after taking control the FO then selected the Vertical Speed (VS) mode of the autopilot which maintains the rate of climb present at the time of VS mode selection. While in the VS 3 mode the autopilot will allow the airspeed to vary in order to hold constant the selected rate of climb. According to the Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) at the time the autopilot transitioned to VS mode the airspeed briefly decreased from 160 to about 135 KIAS then accelerated up to 180 KIAS as the airplane continued in the climb. According to the AOM, “VS mode may be used for enroute climbs, but the crew shall pay particular attention to IAS (indicated airspeed).” The AOM further states, “If climbing during ice accretion or with residual ice on the airframe, IAS is the only FD/AP mode authorized. However, other vertical modes may be used temporarily to transition to an appropriate climb speed.” The captain, according to his statements, diligently looked for possible ice accumulation on the wings, propellers and windshield wipers through out the climb because they had encountered icing conditions on their inbound trip. Up to this point when the crew initially transitioned the autopilot from Climb to VS they had not yet encountered ice accretion and was operating in accordance with their AOM procedures. Their AOM minimum climb speed was 126 KIAS for a clean wing and 141 KIAS if in icing conditions (Vcln+15). The flight was cleared to continue directly to the San Marcus VOR and the crew intended to climb to an altitude of about 13,000 feet msl. The autopilot remained selected in VS mode and according to the DFDR, at 9,200 feet msl the airspeed which had been holding steady at 180 KIAS during the climb began a gradual decrease along with a simultaneous increase in pitch angle. According to the NTSB Performance study the airplane’s aerodynamic lift and drag characteristics exhibited during the deceleration were consistent with the accumulation of ice forming on the airframe. At 11,000 feet msl when according to the DFDR the airspeed had decayed to 140 KIAS, the captain first noticed light rime ice on the windshield wipers and then on the leading edge span of the left wing. At about 11,500 feet msl, with the airspeed continuing to decay the captain began to initiate the manual de-ice boot sequence which requires a crew member to depress the de-ice controls in a certain order, as described in the AOM. This manual operation requires the focused attention of a flight crew member and therefore degrades overall attention for monitoring the status of other items such as airspeed. Within seconds after the captain had directed his attention to the manual de-icing sequence, the cockpit windows became opaque due to a layer of ice. The captain reported that while he was reaching up to engage the de-ice system, the clacker and stick-shaker activated, indicating an imminent stall. According to the DFDR the airspeed had decayed to 118 KIAS as the airplane entered into an aerodynamic stall at about 11,700 feet msl. Moments later the autopilot, which was still selected in the VS mode, disengaged. The captain, who had been focused on the manual de-icing sequence, immediately declared that he was taking control of the aircraft. The airplane began a rapid decent with the wings oscillating. After several oscillations the captain was able to control the decent and stabilize the airplane as it passed through 6,500 feet msl. According to his statement, an immediate concern was to exit IMC and get the airplane below the freezing level. The captain maintained a rate of decent of 500 feet per minute (fpm), declared an emergency to the air traffic controller, and requested a block altitude. He flew the airplane in a controlled descent to about 5,000 feet msl heading in a westerly direction toward the ocean and over Santa Maria, California. During the decent he said that he could hear “large ice masses” impact the sides of the fuselage. The captain opted to continue the flight to LAX, 4 recognizing that the runways were longer and more emergency facilities were available than the surrounding airports. He made several cabin calls to inform the passengers of the situation and explain that he was now in control of the airplane. The airplane was landed at LAX without further incident. 3 Weather 3.1 Weather Radar According to the weather
Recommended publications
  • Initial Piloted Simulation Study of Geared Flap R Tilt-Wing V/STOL
    R NASA Technical Memorandum 103872 Initial Piloted Simulation Study of Geared Flap Control r Tilt-Wing V/STOL Aircraft Lourdes M. Guerrero and Lloyd Da Corliss [NASA-TM-103872) INITIAL PILOTED N93-10741 ~~~U~A~~~NSTUDY QF GEARft) FLAP ~Q~~~~~ fOR TILT-WING V/STOL AIRCRAFT (NASA) 39 p Wncfas 63/08 01180?6 October 1991 National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA Technical Memorandum 103872 Initial Piloted Simulation Study of Geared Flap Control For Tilt-Wing V/STOL Aircraft Lourdes M. Guerrero and Lloyd D Corliss, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California October 1991 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center Moffett Field, Califorrlia94035 -1000 SUMMARY A simulation model was developed for piloted evaluations of a representative tilt-wing V/STOL (Vertical/Short Takeoff and Landing) aircraft. Using this model an initial tilt-wing simulation study was conducted in 1990 on the Ames Vertical Motion Simulator In the past, all tilt-wing aircraft have required a horizontal tail rotor or reaction jets to provide pitch control in hover and low speeds. To alleviate this need, devices such as monocyclic propellers and a geared flap have been proposed for providing control at low speed. The geared flap is the sub- ject of this study and it is compared to the conventional flap used in previous tilt-wing aircraft. Objectives of the study were to simulate a tilt-wing V/STOL aircraft, to evaluate and compare the control effectiveness and handling qualities of both a conventional (programmed flap) and the geared flap control configurations, and to determine the feasibility of eliminating the horizontal tail rotor or reaction jets of prior designs through the use of the geared flap control configuration.
    [Show full text]
  • Vertical Motion Simulator Experiment on Stall Recovery Guidance
    NASA/TP{2017{219733 Vertical Motion Simulator Experiment on Stall Recovery Guidance Stefan Schuet National Aeronautics and Space Administration Thomas Lombaerts Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies, Inc. Vahram Stepanyan Universities Space Research Association John Kaneshige, Kimberlee Shish, Peter Robinson National Aeronautics and Space Administration Gordon Hardy Retired Research Test Pilot Science Applications International Corporation October 2017 NASA STI Program. in Profile Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. to the advancement of aeronautics and space Collected papers from scientific and science. The NASA scientific and technical technical conferences, symposia, seminars, information (STI) program plays a key part or other meetings sponsored or in helping NASA maintain this important co-sponsored by NASA. role. • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, The NASA STI Program operates under the technical, or historical information from auspices of the Agency Chief Information NASA programs, projects, and missions, Officer. It collects, organizes, provides for often concerned with subjects having archiving, and disseminates NASA's STI. substantial public interest. The NASA STI Program provides access to the NASA Aeronautics and Space Database • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English- and its public interface, the NASA Technical language translations of foreign scientific Report Server, thus providing one of the and technical material pertinent to largest collection of aeronautical and space NASA's mission. science STI in the world. Results are Specialized services also include organizing published in both non-NASA channels and and publishing research results, distributing by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, specialized research announcements and which includes the following report types: feeds, providing information desk and • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of personal search support, and enabling data completed research or a major significant exchange services.
    [Show full text]
  • For Improved Airplane Performance
    BLENDED WINGLETS FORFOR IMPROVEDIMPROVED AIRPLANEAIRPLANE PERFORMANCEPERFORMANCE New blended winglets on the Boeing Business Jet and the 737-800 commercial airplane offer operational benefits to customers. Besides giving the airplanes a distinctive appear- ance, the winglets create more efficient flight characteristics in cruise and during takeoff and climbout, which translate into additional range with the same fuel and payload. ROBERT FAYE ROBERT LAPRETE MICHAEL WINTER TECHNICAL DIRECTOR ASSOCIATE TECHNICAL FELLOW PRINCIPAL ENGINEER BOEING BUSINESS JETS AERODYNAMICS TECHNOLOGY STATIC AEROELASTIC LOADS BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES TECHNOLOGY/PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT AERO 16 vertical height of the lifting system (i.e., increasing the length of the TE that sheds the vortices). The winglets increase the spread of the vortices along the TE, creating more lift at the wingtips (figs. 2 and 3). The result is a reduction in induced drag (fig. 4). The maximum benefit of the induced drag reduction depends on the spanwise lift distribution on the wing. Theoretically, for a planar wing, induced drag is opti- mized with an elliptical lift distribution that minimizes the change in vorticity along the span. For the same amount of structural material, nonplanar wingtip 737-800 TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS devices can achieve a similar induced drag benefit as a planar span increase; however, new Boeing airplane designs Passengers focus on minimizing induced drag with 3-class configuration Not applicable The 737-800 commercial airplane wingspan influenced by additional 2-class configuration 162 is one of four 737s introduced BBJ TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS The Boeing Business Jet design benefits. 1-class configuration 189 in the late 1990s for short- to (BBJ) was launched in 1996 On derivative airplanes, performance Cargo 1,555 ft3 (44 m3) medium-range commercial air- Passengers Not applicable as a joint venture between can be improved by using wingtip Boeing and General Electric.
    [Show full text]
  • [4910-13-P] DEPARTMENT of TRANSPORTATION Federal
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 05/13/2021 and available online at federalregister.gov/d/2021-10015, and on govinfo.gov [4910-13-P] DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2021-0366; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00080-T] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; ATR – GIE Avions de Transport Régional Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2020-23-13, which applies to all ATR – GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42-200, -300, and -320 airplanes. AD 2020-23-13 requires a one-time inspection for discrepancies of the wire bundles between the left- and right-hand angle of attack (AOA) probes and the crew alerting computer, and, depending on findings, applicable corrective actions. Since the FAA issued AD 2020-23-13, a wiring modification for the captain stick shaker has been developed, along with an update to the aircraft flight manual (AFM). This proposed AD would continue to require the actions in AD 2020-23-13. This proposed AD would also require, for certain airplanes, modifying the captain stick shaker wiring, and for all airplanes, revising the existing AFM and applicable corresponding operational procedures to incorporate procedures for the stick pusher/shaker, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is proposed for incorporation by reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by [INSERT DATE 45 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].
    [Show full text]
  • Airplane Icing
    Federal Aviation Administration Airplane Icing Accidents That Shaped Our Safety Regulations Presented to: AE598 UW Aerospace Engineering Colloquium By: Don Stimson, Federal Aviation Administration Topics Icing Basics Certification Requirements Ice Protection Systems Some Icing Generalizations Notable Accidents/Resulting Safety Actions Readings – For More Information AE598 UW Aerospace Engineering Colloquium Federal Aviation 2 March 10, 2014 Administration Icing Basics How does icing occur? Cold object (airplane surface) Supercooled water drops Water drops in a liquid state below the freezing point Most often in stratiform and cumuliform clouds The airplane surface provides a place for the supercooled water drops to crystalize and form ice AE598 UW Aerospace Engineering Colloquium Federal Aviation 3 March 10, 2014 Administration Icing Basics Important Parameters Atmosphere Liquid Water Content and Size of Cloud Drop Size and Distribution Temperature Airplane Collection Efficiency Speed/Configuration/Temperature AE598 UW Aerospace Engineering Colloquium Federal Aviation 4 March 10, 2014 Administration Icing Basics Cloud Characteristics Liquid water content is generally a function of temperature and drop size The colder the cloud, the more ice crystals predominate rather than supercooled water Highest water content near 0º C; below -40º C there is negligible water content Larger drops tend to precipitate out, so liquid water content tends to be greater at smaller drop sizes The average liquid water content decreases with horizontal
    [Show full text]
  • Stall Warnings in High Capacity Aircraft: the Australian Context 2008 to 2012
    Stall warnings in high capacityInsert document aircraft: title The Australian context Location2008 to 2012 | Date ATSB Transport Safety Report InvestigationResearch [InsertAviation Mode] Research Occurrence Report Investigation XX-YYYY-####AR-2012-172 Final – 1 November 2013 Publishing information Published by: Australian Transport Safety Bureau Postal address: PO Box 967, Civic Square ACT 2608 Office: 62 Northbourne Avenue Canberra, Australian Capital Territory 2601 Telephone: 1800 020 616, from overseas +61 2 6257 4150 (24 hours) Accident and incident notification: 1800 011 034 (24 hours) Facsimile: 02 6247 3117, from overseas +61 2 6247 3117 Email: [email protected] Internet: www.atsb.gov.au © Commonwealth of Australia 2013 Ownership of intellectual property rights in this publication Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual property rights, if any) in this publication is owned by the Commonwealth of Australia. Creative Commons licence With the exception of the Coat of Arms, ATSB logo, and photos and graphics in which a third party holds copyright, this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence is a standard form license agreement that allows you to copy, distribute, transmit and adapt this publication provided that you attribute the work. The ATSB’s preference is that you attribute this publication (and any material sourced from it) using the following wording: Source: Australian Transport Safety Bureau Copyright in material obtained from other agencies, private individuals or organisations, belongs to those agencies, individuals or organisations. Where you want to use their material you will need to contact them directly.
    [Show full text]
  • Systems Study for an Integrated Digital/Electric Aircraft (IDEA)
    NASA-CR-3840 19850007405 NASA Contractor Report 3840 t i Systems Study for an Integrated Digital/Electric Aircraft (IDEA) G. E. Tagge, L. A. Irish, and A. R.Bailey CONTRACT NAS1-17528 JANUARY 1985 R [_.._ _ _ _'l _ €__!7 . ','7:2! ' ;: ;; 11) LANGLEY RESEJtRCHCEI",I_ER LIBRARY, NASA H;_4MPTO_JVIRG_N!A, NASA Contractor Report 3840 Systems Study for an Integrated Digital/Electric Aircraft (IDEA) G. E. Tagge, L. A. Irish, and A. R. Bailey Boeing Commercial Airplane Company Seattle, Washington Prepared for Langley Research Center under Contract NAS1-17528 N/ A NationalAeronautics and SpaceAdministration Scientific and Technical IntormatlonBranch 1985 FOREWORD This document constitutes the final report of the Integrated Digital/Electric Aircraft (IDEA)Program,ContractNASI-17528. The major studyobjectiveweres to definethe configurationof an IDEA aircraftd,efine technicalrisksassociatedwith the IDEA systemsconcepts,and identifytheresearchand developmentrequiredto reducetheserisksforpotentialapplicationto transporatircraft intheearly1990s. The NASA TechnicalRepresentativeforthistaskwas Cary R. SF1tzer;the Contracting Officerwas James Y. Taylor,of theLangleyResearchCenter. The work was accompUshed withinthe PreUmlnaryDesign Department of the Boeing Commercial AirplaneCompany. Key personnelwho contrlbutewdere: G. E.Tagge ProgramManager L.A. Irish StudyManager J.D.Vachal AerodynamicsTechnology L.A. Ostrom AerodynamicsTechnology R. H. Johnson PropulslonTeclmology G. G. Redfield PropulsionTechnology A. R. Bailey WeightsTechnology K. E. Siedentopf We_,_htsTechnology D. L.Grande StructuresTechnology C. B. Crumb Electronic FlightControlDesign F.Byford Mechanical FlightControlDesign W. F. Shivttz Flight Systems Technology C. W. Lee Flight Systems Technology P.J.Campbell FUght Systems Technology J. W. Harper Airframe Systems Technology-Electrlcal K. T. Tanemura AirframeSystemsTechnology-ECS E. C. Lim AirframeSystemsTechnology-ECS R. A. Johnson AirframeSystemsTechnology-ECS D. E. Cozby AirframeSystemsTechnology-lcing J.R.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of the FAA's Review of the Boeing 737
    Summary of the FAA’s Review of the Boeing 737 MAX Summary of the FAA’s Review of the Boeing 737 MAX Return to Service of the Boeing 737 MAX Aircraft Date: November 18, 2020 Summary of the FAA’s Review of the Boeing 737 MAX This page intentionally left blank. 1 Summary of the FAA’s Review of the Boeing 737 MAX Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................ 5 Introduction .................................................................................................... 5 Post-Accident Actions ....................................................................................... 6 Summary of Changes to Aircraft Design and Operation ........................................ 9 Additional Changes Related to the Flight Control Software Update. ...................... 10 Training Enhancements .................................................................................. 11 Compliance Activity ....................................................................................... 12 System Safety Analysis .................................................................................. 13 Return to Service .......................................................................................... 13 Conclusion .................................................................................................... 14 1. Purpose of Final Summary ........................................................................... 15 2. Introduction ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SPECIAL BULLETINS COMMERCIAL AIR TRANSPORT SPORT AVIATION / BALLOONS GENERAL AVIATION CONTENTS ADDENDA and CORRECTIONS
    AAIB Bulletin: 6/2010 CONTENTS SPECIAL BULLETINS None COMMERCIAL AIR TRANSPORT FIXED WING Boeing 747-436 G-CIVB 11-Jul-09 1 Cessna 401 VQ-TLG 24-Jul-09 6 Cessna 421 Golden Eagle N1FY 25-Jan-10 7 DHC-8-402 Dash 8 Q400 G-JEDM 03-Mar-09 10 Embraer ERJ 190-200 LR (Embraer 195) G-FBEH 01-Aug-08 20 SAAB-Scania SF340A G-GNTF 08-Oct-09 33 ROTORCRAFT None GENERAL AVIATION FIXED WING Aviat A-1B Husky G-HSKI 03-Jan-10 34 Avid Flyer C G-IMPY 01-Mar-10 35 Europa XS G-BYFG 29-May-09 36 Falco F8L G-REEC 09-Aug-09 43 Morane Saulnier MS.894A Rallye Minerva G-BKBF 13-Mar-10 44 Siai Marchetti F260C N61FD 21-Mar-10 45 Taylor Monoplane G-BLDB 25-Mar-10 46 ROTORCRAFT None SPORT AVIATION / BALLOONS Flight Design CTSW G-CERA 30-Jun-09 47 Jabiru UL-450 G-BYYT 13-Jun-09 49 Pegasus Quik G-TCNY 11-Apr-10 50 Skyranger Swift 912S(1) G-CEZE 01-Mar-10 51 ADDENDA and CORRECTIONS Airbus A320-231 G-MEDA 31-Mar-03 52 © Crown copyright 2010 i AAIB Bulletin: 6/2010 CONTENTS (Continued) Summary of: Air Accident Report No: 2/2010 54 Report on the accident to Beech 200C Super King Air, VQ-TIU at 1 nm south-east of North Caicos Airport Turks and Caicos Islands, British West Indies on 6 February 2007 Summary of: Air Accident Report No: 3/2010 59 Cessna Citation 500, VP-BGE 2 nm NNE of Biggin Hill Airport on 30 March 2008 List of recent aircraft accident reports issued by the AAIB 62 (ALL TIMES IN THIS BULLETIN ARE UTC) © Crown copyright 2010 ii AAIB Bulletin: 6/2010 G-CIVB EW/C2009/07/09 SERIOUS INCIDENT Aircraft Type and Registration: Boeing 747-436, G-CIVB No & Type of Engines:
    [Show full text]
  • Crash During Experimental Test Flight, Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation GVI (G650), N652GD, Roswell, New Mexico, April 2, 2011
    Crash During Experimental Test Flight Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation GVI (G650), N652GD Roswell, New Mexico April 2, 2011 Accident Report NTSB/AAR-12/02 National PB2012-910402 Transportation Safety Board NTSB/AAR-12/02 PB2012-910402 Notation 8439 Adopted October 10, 2012 Aircraft Accident Report Crash During Experimental Test Flight Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation GVI (G650), N652GD Roswell, New Mexico April 2, 2011 National Transportation Safety Board 490 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W. Washington, DC 20594 National Transportation Safety Board. 2012. Crash During Experimental Test Flight, Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation GVI (G650), N652GD, Roswell, New Mexico, April 2, 2011. Aircraft Accident Report NTSB/AAR-12/02. Washington, DC. Abstract: This report discusses the April 2, 2011, accident involving an experimental Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation GVI (G650), N652GD, which crashed during takeoff from runway 21 at Roswell International Air Center, Roswell, New Mexico. The two pilots and the two flight test engineers were fatally injured, and the airplane was substantially damaged by impact forces and a postcrash fire. Safety issues discussed in this report are the maximum lift coefficient for airplanes in ground effect; flight test standard operating policies and procedures; flight test-specific safety management system guidance; and coordination of high-risk test flights among flight test operators, airport operations, and aircraft rescue and firefighting personnel. Safety recommendations concerning these issues are addressed to the Federal
    [Show full text]
  • Rejected Landing)
    Transportation Safety Board Bureau de la sécurité des transports of Canada du Canada AVIATION OCCURRENCE REPORT A97H0011 LOSS OF CONTROL ON GO-AROUND (REJECTED LANDING) AIR CANADA CANADAIR CL-600-2B19 C-FSKI FREDERICTON AIRPORT, NEW BRUNSWICK 16 DECEMBER 1997 The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) investigated this occurrence for the purpose of advancing transportation safety. It is not the function of the Board to assign fault or determine civil or criminal liability. Aviation Occurrence Report Loss of Control on Go-around (Rejected Landing) Air Canada Canadair CL-600-2B19 C-FSKI Fredericton Airport, New Brunswick 16 December 1997 Report Number A97H0011 Synopsis Air Canada Flight 646, C-FSKI, departed Toronto-Lester B. Pearson International Airport, Ontario, at 2124 eastern standard time on a scheduled flight to Fredericton, New Brunswick. On arrival, the reported ceiling was 100 feet obscured, the visibility one-eighth of a mile in fog, and the runway visual range 1200 feet. The crew conducted a Category I instrument landing system approach to runway 15 and elected to land. On reaching about 35 feet, the captain assessed that the aircraft was not in a position to land safely and ordered the first officer, who was flying the aircraft, to go around. As the aircraft reached its go-around pitch attitude of about 10 degrees, the aircraft stalled aerodynamically, struck the runway, veered to the right and then travelled—at full power and uncontrolled—about 2100 feet from the first impact point, struck a large tree and came to rest. An evacuation was conducted; however, seven passengers were trapped in the aircraft until rescued.
    [Show full text]
  • Flight Testing Angle-Of-Attack Warning Combinations on Part 23 Aircraft
    Flight Testing Angle-of-Attack Warning Combinations on Part 23 Aircraft Jennifer Grey Geehan Bachelor of Science Aerospace Engineering Florida Institute of Technology A thesis submitted to the College of Engineering and Computing at Florida Institute of Technology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of: Master of Science in Flight Test Engineering Melbourne, Florida December 2017 Abstract Flight Testing Angle-of-Attack Warning Combinations on Part 23 Aircraft Jennifer Grey Geehan Advisor: Brian A. Kish, Ph.D. The high number of accidents involving General Aviation (GA) aircraft leads to a need for improved methods to warn pilots of high angles of attack (AOA) and impending stall. Such methods must be certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) under Federal Aviation Regulations Part 23 regarding their effectiveness in preventing departures from controlled flight. Therefore, methods of compliance must be developed to certify Part 23 aircraft equipped with AOA warning or limiting systems. The research objectives were to (a) determine methods for the evaluation of AOA warning and limiting systems and to (b) evaluate the effectiveness of baseline combinations of such systems. The warning systems included visual, aural, and haptic feedback cues. The work performed in this study was the design, implementation, and testing of an AOA indicator that intuitively displayed the aircraft’s AOA and its current flap configuration. Also tested were aural alerts that informed the pilot of both the state of the aircraft and the actions needed to prevent further energy decay. Finally, an active stick that provided haptic feedback by shaking, pushing, and stepwise increasing the stick force depending on AOA was tested.
    [Show full text]